I finally found some time to have a look at the game and watch some casts. I am disappointed. The cell shaded, bright colors style was hard to look at when lol came out 15 years ago. This iteration Im seeing now in Stormgate makes me want to look away immediatly.
I know visual preferences differ. To each their own and so on. To me this looks lime a teenager drew it in the early 2000s. Hard to look at for me.
On January 18 2024 08:08 Branch.AUT wrote: I finally found some time to have a look at the game and watch some casts. I am disappointed. The cell shaded, bright colors style was hard to look at when lol came out 15 years ago. This iteration Im seeing now in Stormgate makes me want to look away immediatly.
I know visual preferences differ. To each their own and so on. To me this looks lime a teenager drew it in the early 2000s. Hard to look at for me.
I like the look. Draws me in way more than what ZeroSpace or Tempest Rising look like but like said, personal preference. And I think it's easy on the hardware making it playable for more people as well as raising the maximum people playing the same game. In SC2 4v4 was the max and 800 vs 800 supply was freezing most machines. I think SG plans to have a max of 32 players AFAIK.
On January 18 2024 08:08 Branch.AUT wrote: I finally found some time to have a look at the game and watch some casts. I am disappointed. The cell shaded, bright colors style was hard to look at when lol came out 15 years ago. This iteration Im seeing now in Stormgate makes me want to look away immediatly.
I know visual preferences differ. To each their own and so on. To me this looks lime a teenager drew it in the early 2000s. Hard to look at for me.
I like the look. Draws me in way more than what ZeroSpace or Tempest Rising look like but like said, personal preference. And I think it's easy on the hardware making it playable for more people as well as raising the maximum people playing the same game. In SC2 4v4 was the max and 800 vs 800 supply was freezing most machines. I think SG plans to have a max of 32 players AFAIK.
Goes to show how visual art is a matter of individual taste. For me it means that any kind of "spectator game" or "esports competition" marketing will fall flat for me in Stormgate.
Talking about hardware limitations. Warno offers 10v10 multiplayer right now. With each player fielding up to, and bigger, the size of sc2 armies. I havent heard of performance issues with that gane mode so far. So it's clearly possible, to have large multiplayer battles with decent graphics. All that aside, colors choices, should make exactly zero difference in performance. Zelda wind waker bright green, needs exactly the same amount of computing power as displaying a dark olive green color.
You don't have vision of high ground until a unit attacks you from high ground, in which case you can attack back. Nothing else is implemented yet but they previously talked about how they wanted to make high ground important.
On January 19 2024 23:50 _Spartak_ wrote: You don't have vision of high ground until a unit attacks you from high ground, in which case you can attack back. Nothing else is implemented yet but they previously talked about how they wanted to make high ground important.
This sounds even less important than in SC2, where it is not very important at all. Sure they said they want to make it important but I have my doubts when the team mainly has a SC2 + WC3 - a game, which is not really known for its impactful highground to put it lightly - background...
On January 20 2024 02:09 _Spartak_ wrote: A lot of mechanics haven't been implemented yet. There will be high-ground advantage in some form in the final game.
It's odd they haven't shown, or probably decided, on how they're doing this.
I can see vision like in sc2 being an issue because they don't have many air units, and have said they want air units to be weaker. In sc2 all races get air units fairly quick so high ground vision isn't too powerful.
Maybe a flat damage reduction? or a range reduction?
On January 20 2024 02:09 _Spartak_ wrote: A lot of mechanics haven't been implemented yet. There will be high-ground advantage in some form in the final game.
It's odd they haven't shown, or probably decided, on how they're doing this.
I can see vision like in sc2 being an issue because they don't have many air units, and have said they want air units to be weaker. In sc2 all races get air units fairly quick so high ground vision isn't too powerful.
Maybe a flat damage reduction? or a range reduction?
In BW there is a chance to miss uphill. For the longest time I was in favour of a flat damage reduction, like you mentioned, instead because I dislike luck-based mechanics in competitive games. However, I have somewhat changed my mind on that in recent years. The advantage of a "x% chance of missing" over "x% damage reduction" is that it is less calculable. This will make players play more conservatively when attacking from low ground which strengthens high ground beyond raw numbers. Now, I'm not entirely opposed to damage reduction but I prefer chance to miss in this instance.
On January 20 2024 02:09 _Spartak_ wrote: A lot of mechanics haven't been implemented yet. There will be high-ground advantage in some form in the final game.
It's odd they haven't shown, or probably decided, on how they're doing this.
I can see vision like in sc2 being an issue because they don't have many air units, and have said they want air units to be weaker. In sc2 all races get air units fairly quick so high ground vision isn't too powerful.
Maybe a flat damage reduction? or a range reduction?
In BW there is a chance to miss uphill. For the longest time I was in favour of a flat damage reduction, like you mentioned, instead because I dislike luck-based mechanics in competitive games. However, I have somewhat changed my mind on that in recent years. The advantage of a "x% chance of missing" over "x% damage reduction" is that it is less calculable. This will make players play more conservatively when attacking from low ground which strengthens high ground beyond raw numbers. Now, I'm not entirely opposed to damage reduction but I prefer chance to miss in this instance.
The luck based low to highground interaction of BW was absolutely horrible. One bunker could hold the highground vs a ridiculous amount of low attacks speed units like Dragoons
On January 20 2024 02:09 _Spartak_ wrote: A lot of mechanics haven't been implemented yet. There will be high-ground advantage in some form in the final game.
It's odd they haven't shown, or probably decided, on how they're doing this.
I can see vision like in sc2 being an issue because they don't have many air units, and have said they want air units to be weaker. In sc2 all races get air units fairly quick so high ground vision isn't too powerful.
Maybe a flat damage reduction? or a range reduction?
In BW there is a chance to miss uphill. For the longest time I was in favour of a flat damage reduction, like you mentioned, instead because I dislike luck-based mechanics in competitive games. However, I have somewhat changed my mind on that in recent years. The advantage of a "x% chance of missing" over "x% damage reduction" is that it is less calculable. This will make players play more conservatively when attacking from low ground which strengthens high ground beyond raw numbers. Now, I'm not entirely opposed to damage reduction but I prefer chance to miss in this instance.
The luck based low to highground interaction of BW was absolutely horrible. One bunker could hold the highground vs a ridiculous amount of low attacks speed units like Dragoons
Isn't that what you'd want out of highground advantage?
On January 20 2024 02:09 _Spartak_ wrote: A lot of mechanics haven't been implemented yet. There will be high-ground advantage in some form in the final game.
It's odd they haven't shown, or probably decided, on how they're doing this.
I can see vision like in sc2 being an issue because they don't have many air units, and have said they want air units to be weaker. In sc2 all races get air units fairly quick so high ground vision isn't too powerful.
Maybe a flat damage reduction? or a range reduction?
In BW there is a chance to miss uphill. For the longest time I was in favour of a flat damage reduction, like you mentioned, instead because I dislike luck-based mechanics in competitive games. However, I have somewhat changed my mind on that in recent years. The advantage of a "x% chance of missing" over "x% damage reduction" is that it is less calculable. This will make players play more conservatively when attacking from low ground which strengthens high ground beyond raw numbers. Now, I'm not entirely opposed to damage reduction but I prefer chance to miss in this instance.
The luck based low to highground interaction of BW was absolutely horrible. One bunker could hold the highground vs a ridiculous amount of low attacks speed units like Dragoons
I do not mind it because the larger the scale of the combat the lower the luck factor.
On January 20 2024 02:09 _Spartak_ wrote: A lot of mechanics haven't been implemented yet. There will be high-ground advantage in some form in the final game.
It's odd they haven't shown, or probably decided, on how they're doing this.
I can see vision like in sc2 being an issue because they don't have many air units, and have said they want air units to be weaker. In sc2 all races get air units fairly quick so high ground vision isn't too powerful.
Maybe a flat damage reduction? or a range reduction?
In BW there is a chance to miss uphill. For the longest time I was in favour of a flat damage reduction, like you mentioned, instead because I dislike luck-based mechanics in competitive games. However, I have somewhat changed my mind on that in recent years. The advantage of a "x% chance of missing" over "x% damage reduction" is that it is less calculable. This will make players play more conservatively when attacking from low ground which strengthens high ground beyond raw numbers. Now, I'm not entirely opposed to damage reduction but I prefer chance to miss in this instance.
The luck based low to highground interaction of BW was absolutely horrible. One bunker could hold the highground vs a ridiculous amount of low attacks speed units like Dragoons
Isn't that what you'd want out of highground advantage?
In general, that is okay. Mind you I did say could. It also could have gone the other way. Built in Chance/ luck does not belong into competitive esport. It's okay to have mine drag shots like in SC2 for example because there is skill behind it. But thats just my humble opinion
EPT
